Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit
 fractions?
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 23:50:17 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <vbjhf9$1rat4$5@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org>
 <3d1a8334-deee-45c6-ae03-340cd8551908@att.net> <vbafj7$3vd6q$1@dont-email.me>
 <69325e33-6b9a-4c2f-a0e3-25508d41b114@att.net>
 <rMATvapsf5bpmLmDOt3mDtI5bcA@jntp>
 <d7e0b83e-66ca-4d1f-a165-69c0dd47718e@att.net> <vberjd$qdqn$1@dont-email.me>
 <9a283f449c72aebaeb1ee162e2089cb7ff422999@i2pn2.org>
 <vbhif6$1bi3l$5@dont-email.me>
 <c3127ea5fa703a8c9a565c54b9e85f93c2cacee2@i2pn2.org>
 <vbhkit$1bi3l$7@dont-email.me> <vbihtg$1i4ps$4@dont-email.me>
 <vbiqf9$1jghe$6@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2024 08:50:17 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d44d7012c3ec9d16fb2fdce73058c980";
	logging-data="1944484"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+IdnXc1Ep2Az59gc9KiAd55XyLXAMSHB8="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+A27nwVBzjhHSve3S6n4hpFO5h4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vbiqf9$1jghe$6@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2730

On 9/7/2024 5:17 PM, Moebius wrote:
> Am 07.09.2024 um 23:51 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
> 
>>> The unit fractions are identical because they sit at the same x, but 
>>> they differ because they are ℵo different unit fractions.
> 
> Mückenheim, für jedes x e IR, x > 0, sind die "ℵo different unit 
> fractions" 1/ceil(1/x + 1), 1/ceil(1/x + 2), 1/ceil(1/x + 3), ... 
> allesamt KLEINER als x. Außerdem sind sie paarweise verschieden. Heißt: 
> An,m e IN: n =/= m -> 1/ceil(1/x + n) =/= 1/ceil(1/x + m). Also, nein, 
> they DON'T "sit at the same x".
> 
> Man kann das auch so hinschreiben: Für jedes x e IR, x > 0:
> 
>        0 < ... < 1/ceil(1/x + 3) < 1/ceil(1/x + 2) < 1/ceil(1/x + 1) < x.
> 
> Dein Gelaber wird zunehmend wirrer, Mückenheim.
> 
> ____________________________________________________________________
> 
> Man kann da auch gleich den "Beweis" für den Umstand einflechten, dass 
> es keinen kleinsten Stammbruch gibt:
> 
>        0 < ... < 1/(1/s + 1) < s < ... < 1/ceil(1/x + 3) < 1/ceil(1/x + 
> 2) < 1/ceil(1/x + 1) < x.

WM cannot be this bad, right? wow...

Steve Martin as RUPRECHT

https://youtu.be/eF8QAeQm3ZM